Why Doesn't Google Care About Pythons?

They're the largest type of snakes in the world. Indigenous to three continents. Capable of killing a human being. And generally just a really fascinating animal.

But who cares about all that? Certainly not Google.

To understand what this article is about, feel free to do this little experiment on your own. Go to any Google search bar right now and search for the word "python." Check out the results. Don't want to? Don't worry -- I already did it for you. Here's what I found, and here's why it's a problem.

When I searched for the snake a couple of days ago (all I really wanted to know was if that type of serpent is venomous), what I got was 17 pages of search results concerned almost entirely with Python the programming language. It quickly struck me that there wasn't a single result on the first page of results about the actual animal. Curious as to how long it might take until a webpage discussing the animal would appear in the results, I started clicking through the pages of results. The further I dug, the tighter Python programming results wrapped around my brain. And the less hope I had of learning anything useful about, as Grandma would say, "one of God's good creatures."

Page title after page title appeared:

• Python Tutorial.
• The Python Package Index.
• Python - Reddit.
• xkcd : python.
• Python for Everybody.
• and on and on

It wasn't until the seventh page of search results that I came across a non-coding-related webpage. And even that result wasn't at all concerned with python the animal. It was the webpage of a steel rollercoaster called Python that exists at a theme park in the Netherlands. (Side note: days later, I'm still being served up banner ads for the amusement park I hope never to visit. The costumed character featured in the ad looks astoundingly creepy.) 

Growing concerned that I'd never be served up a result for learning more about the who-knows-how-many thousands of years old animal, I checked out the "Searches related to python" section at the bottom of the Google search results page. There, the extra/suggested search options were also strictly related to the coding language. So, I retyped "python" into the search bar in order to see what sort of auto-complete suggestions emerged. Again, all were exclusive to the topic of coding: "what is python programming", "python tutorial", etc. I couldn't help but wonder if the problem was me -- if I was losing my mind. "The python is a real animal, isn't it? I didn't somehow make this creature up in my head, right?"

Naively, I continued to consult the Google search results pages to find out. It wasn't until page 11 that I came across ONLY THE SECOND non-coding-related page. This was a link to a company named Kammok, which is selling an item called "Python straps." This product is, according to the meta data displayed under the page title: “tree-friendly hammock straps equipped with daisy chain materials boasting superior strength…yada yada.” Also listed under the link title on the results page: "$19.00 - In stock." Good to know, I guess. But is a python venomous? 

Finally, on page 14, I got a result pertaining to the actual animal. But this result wasn’t the Wikipedia page for the python, or some other page with general information about the animal itself. It was a “news” video result that was titled: “Watch: Python falls from ceiling of bank during staff meeting.” This Google-worthy event occurred in China.

On page 15 was another result for this same China video. Besides the few non-python-language results that I've specifically mentioned, every other result so far was about the coding language.

"Dear diary, I'm deep into the jungle of Google search results. I have reached page 16. Here, trudging through the muck of python coding results, I have come across something eye-catching. No wait. It's just another result for the video of the ceiling python."

On page 17, the results finally became more varied (still with no general information on what a real python actually is). Non-coding results included: 

1. a deep google books result (book published in 1891) about a stomach-troubled python in captivity
2. a ‘graphic video’ of a man putting a python in his mouth 
3. another deep Google books result concerning a 1908 book published by the Zoological Society of London 
4. yet another Google book result, this book published in 1870 by Society of Friends, that briefly mentions a person's encounter with a python 
5. a news story about some pythons being seized by customs, and 
6. a BBC interview with Monty Python star Eric Idle. Even Pythons of the "Monty variety" take this long to register in Google search results.

Page 17 was literally the last page of results provided by Google. There was no page 18. Not once was there a result for the actual animal called python. The trail has gone cold. The journey is over.

I'm not suggesting that these results don't "make sense." I assume there are many more people using Google every day to look for webpages concerned with the coding language rather than for pages on the animal. But is there really so much bias for the digital world? Imagine a child doing some research homework on the snake. "What's a python, mom?" "Google it." The Google world presented to the child has literally almost zero concern for what exists beyond the digital realm. How about an English-as-a-second-language learner who's trying to educate themself on the word 'python'? Or even someone who is wondering why the coding language is called "Python"? What is a python anyway? "Google it," someone tells them. Unless that person knows a python is also a snake -- and so knows to add that to their search query -- they might be better off going out onto the street and asking someone what they know about the word. 

In assessing these coding-heavy results pages, I think two things are happening:

First, (and I know this is a stretch) the digital world is being weighted over the natural -- though, maybe not with direct intention. Google is a digital tool, so it may follow that it favors the digital realm. Whether or not this is at all intentional, this seems problematic in a world that needs conservation and natural knowledge. This swing and a miss seems problematic for societies in need of education on what is tangible, both the wonders of the natural world and the ways in which that world is being rapidly changed. Again, this could be a totally unintended, secondary result of Google itself operating in the digital world. But couldn't it be something that Google considers?

Second, and probably more intentionally, marketplace results are being weighted over non-market results. Why did I get a page selling a hammock strap before I got one for the animal it's named after? Why did I know how much it cost? Or that it was in stock? Because Google is also a tool of commerce. It is a library of knowledge and information, yes, but more often (or, more specially) it is a sort of digital mall directory. Though there could certainly be more research done on this and more concrete data to support this theory: the Internet on the whole is being used as a way for us to sell things to one another much more often than as a way for us to educate one another. Indeed, even the articles we write to educate one another are often written as a vehicle to sell something (content marketing). No judgement here, but I think this is a fact that we should all acknowledge. Also worth mentioning, webpages designed to market or sell are also designed to take advantage of search engine optimization weighting. Educational pages, like national parks pages or wikis, likely will not be written as much for SEO -- or, at least these organizations may not be writing them with as much gusto or resources. And the natural world has little to no marketing department.

I understand results pages are constantly in flux, so this experiment can differ from one day to the next. But, at this point, it's difficult to see why the python's general info pages would ever slink its way up the results charts -- unless Google wants to change its approach and find it valuable to let searchers know that, even though Python programming is extremely popular and currently valuable, you might also like to know that there's a creature in this world with the same name.

I also understand that in searching for "python," I've come across a special case. Searching for "rattlesnake" resulted in that animal's Wikipedia page being the first result. And all other search results on the first Google page were exclusively concerned with this snake. Searching "ruby" (another programming language) resulted in a mix of results: Ruby on Rails was the number one result. The actual gemstone was second. A host of restaurants and other business with "ruby" in their names also turned up. Imagine, though, if "Rattlesnake" became the name of the next popular coding language. How far down the results list would that animal be pushed in favor of tutorials or marketers trying to educate you about the language?

(Side note #2: I just searched "anaconda" for the hell of it. Top result is the Nicki Minaj video. Her song rules the first results page, with other appearances by python programming-related results and some kind of heavy equipment machine. Pop culture and marketplace items rule here, too. No info here on the snake itself.)

I'm not trying to sound some alarm or put Google up against the wall. Except, in a way, I am. Because I think the 'real' world, the 'non-digital' world deserves its place in our education. I think Google has a responsibility to recognize itself as an educational tool and at least try to show us the world as it is, not necessarily as it is being manipulated digitally or for marketing purposes. What's popular is popular, sure. What sells, sells. But I think it's time we all understand that those considerations are more important to how Google displays the world than showing searchers what or how the world actually is.

There's probably more to it than all of this -- and other perspectives to take into account. If you have other thoughts, let me know what you think!

-- by Aaron Moncivaiz